Congratulations Bar Takers!

Congratulations to all of you who recently completed the Nevada bar!

So, how was it? We're sure some of our soon-to-be-graduating readers would appreciate a heads-up on the subjects tested. If you took it, let us know in the comments.

Also, we have extended the final day for submission of Shark Pimp questions through Sunday, as we know a lot of you catch up on your legal gossip over the weekend. Keep the questions coming!

Finally, don't forget to weigh in with your opinion on cram-down mortgage legislation in the ongoing comment discussion featuring attorney Anthony Deluca.

What Conflict?

Maybe it's just us, but we're not so sure about this recent ad featuring Las Vegas attorney Anthony Deluca. It seems to us that a bankruptcy attorney asking residents to contact their representatives and push for cram-down mortgages may be a little self-interested.

In reality, we are just jealous that we didn't choose bankruptcy as an area of practice. Well played, Tony.

UPDATE: Anthony Deluca responds in the comments.

(The Spot)

Good Luck on the Bar Exam!

To all of you early graduates, out-of-staters, and second-time takers, good luck on the February Bar Exam from your friends at WWL. In case you needed corroboration concerning the audacity of what you are doing, David Mills has provided his (humorous) take.

Feel free to use the comments of this post to blow off steam in between essays days.

Ask the "Shark Pimp"

In this (potentially) downward-spiraling market, we thought it would be a good idea to get another Q & A going with everyone's favorite law firm headhunter, Mr. Jordan Ross. This was very successful the last time we did it, and should be even more interesting now that the market has transitioned from "Vegas to 120" to "please sir, may I have some more?"

Jordan Ross is the only Nevada member of the National Association of Legal Search Consultants. He is the principal of Ross Legal Search, LLC and previously served four years as a Vice-President with John Kurosky & Associates, a legal search firm in Irvine CA. In layman's terms: he finds jobs for those looking to make a lateral move, and he's good at it.

If you have a question you would like us to pose to Mr. Ross about anything related to our Nevada legal market, please post it in the comments or drop us a line at nevadalegal@gmail.com. We will take submissions until Friday, then submit your questions to Mr. Ross. The responses will be included in a future post. 

Time To Bring Back The Stocks

Lending further credence to our theory that you actually have to murder a client to get disbarred in this state, The Supremes suspended two attorneys this week.

Las Vegas attorney Doug Crawford was suspended from practicing law for 5 years for stealing $398,345 from his clients in order to support his gambling habit.

The Supremes rejected the Disciplinary Board's recommendation to disbar Crawford stating “[t]he purpose of attorney discipline is to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession, not to punish the attorney.”

Right. Public, you may consider yourself protected ... for the next five years. After that, you're on your own.

Crawford has been temporarily suspended since 5/1/07 pending the outcome of this hearing. No word on whether he'll get credit for time served.

Next, Las Vegas attorney Darren Walker received a 40 month sentence for "engaging in the unauthorized practice of law and for not responding to a formal complaint filed against him by the State Bar of Nevada."

Walker was suspended (for the first time) in 2007 for failing to pay his bar dues and for failing to maintain his continuing legal education requirements. While he was suspended, a snitch fellow attorney reported that he was continuing to practice law.

Huh, well, we're sure he will listen this time. No more practicing law, Darren! You don't want to risk another suspension, do you?

The Supremes gave Walker a 40 month suspension despite the Disciplinary Board's recommendation of 30 months; which begs the question: Why do we have a Disciplinary Board?

(LV Sun; LVRJ)

Twenty Five Dollars

The LV Sun headline reads: "Controversy erupts over prosecutors paying witnesses for interviews." The "controversy" in question arises from the Clark County District Attorney's interpretation of NRS 50.225, the statute that provides for the paying of witness fees and expenses. According to the statute, witnesses are "[t]o be paid a fee of $25 for each day’s attendance ... ," and includes a section authorizing the reimbursement of travel expenses.

The current contention arose when the Nevada ACLU learned that the district attorney has been paying witnesses the same statutory $25 stipend for appearances at pre-trial conferences. The ACLU contends that the statute only provides for payment to witnesses for testifying during trial, on the record. The district attorney believes that the same law also allows for their pretrial conference payments.

Honestly, we don't see what all the fuss is about. It seems logical to us that if you are going to pay a witness for their time to show up during trial, the witness should also be entitled to reimbursement when they take the time to show up for a pretrial conference. Sure, some are worried that prosecutors are paying for favorable testimony, but it seems to us that any such witness bias could easily be cleared up by a competent defense attorney on cross examination.

However, it appears that the Sun and its commenters have sided with the ACLU on this one. We're interested in your take on this, WWL commenters. Does the reimbursement of witness fees by the district attorney's office bother you?

(LV Sun)

Advertising 101

How do you promote a potentially tanking business model? You sex it up, of course. This is exactly what Ticket Busters (a.k.a. Richard Harris' mini-firm) has done. 

Available NOW at TB's front desk is a pinup-style calendar featuring scantily-clad photos of ... their employees (actual cover pictured at right). Apparently, Ticket Busters took the time honored "sex sells" slogan to heart, and started hiring out-of-work stripers to handle the complex legal work that accompanies getting traffic fines reduced shuffle papers.

We're unsure whether we want TB to succeed with this endeavor. After all, is anyone excited about the prospect of a "Girls of Lionel Sawyer" calendar coming down the pike? For those who would like to get their own copy of this filth, just pick up the phone and keep dialing the number of the beast ... sinners. 

(Thanks for the tip, Anonymous)

Layoff Watch, Part II

We started receiving tips yesterday that KKBRF has recently made some major cuts. According to the tips, the layoffs started in their Reno office on Wednesday with one partner and one associate being cut loose. On Thursday, they reportedly laid off three transactional attorneys and "at least" two litigation attorneys, plus staff. 

Apparently, no one is sure if the (rumored) cuts are related to the (rumored) merger with Greenberg Traurig, or if the economy is to blame. Either way it sucks. This is truly a sad state of affairs, and our hearts go out to our fellow colleagues. Please post any denials, confirmations or further information in the comments. 

UPDATE:

We received a follow up tip with the final body count: 

4 - Litigation attorneys (2 from Vegas, 2 from Reno)
4 - Transactional attorneys (one very pregnant)
1 - Government Affairs attorney
All related staff

We also received news from one of our tipsters regarding the post-massacre meeting:

"There was a firm wide meeting at the end of the day where they said that the remaining attorneys who had not been laid off would be the firm going forward, and if we merge with GT, this will generally be our firm merging (interesting use of the word "generally" by managing partner Mike Bonner, I overheard some litigation attorneys really parsing his language on that issue...lawyers are nerds). They also said that some partners will be leaving on their own terms by April, no word on which partners. The general justification for the layoffs was the poor economy, though they noted that we have lots of money in the bank after a pretty good year last year. This year is going to be tough.
There is a lot of speculation amongst the remaining associates that more layoffs could occur, and also that a number of partners will split and open a new firm."

SECOND UPDATE  (2/20/08):

Looks like the LV Sun (finally) got around to reporting this. Many thanks to you tipsters for the scoop.

According to the Sun, the total body count was "at least nine attorneys" plus three to four support staff. The Sun was also able to get a quote from the firm:

“We did have some reductions,” firm spokeswoman Diane Gibes said. “Like so many companies across the country we were affected by the economic downturn. It’s unfortunate, but we felt we needed a leaner structure.”

"[W]e felt we needed a leaner structure?" We're sure that makes those of you who ended up on the wrong end of a pink slip feel awesome.

(Thanks for the tips, Anonymous.) 

Cha-Ching!

Who says Nevada juries are hostile to plaintiffs? LawyersUSA has put together its annual top 10 list of windfall jury verdicts for 2008, and Nevada jurys made the list ... twice!

Coming in at number seven, a Nevada man was awarded $60 million in a bad faith retrial:

Four years ago, a Nevada jury awarded $1.6 million to G. Clinton Merrick, then tacked on another $10 million in punitive damages. But after the 9th Circuit ordered a retrial of the punitive award, the plaintiff's team used the ensuing four years to build an even stronger case. ... The company is appealing [the subsequent $60 million verdict] ...

Yeah, why not appeal? That first one turned out well. The case's underlying facts are a pretty good read, but the plaintiff's attorney, sadly, was not from Nevada.

Nevada also holds the number ONE spot on the list with the $388 million jury award handed down in Gilbert Hyatt vs. California Franchise Tax Board (previously covered here and here). From the article:

The compensatory damages include $85 million for emotional distress, $52 million for invasion of privacy and $1.1 million in attorney fees and prejudgment interest. Eight days later, the jury voted seven to one to add $250 million in punitive damages, after finding the tax agency acted with oppression, fraud or malice.

We've received a tip regarding some recent happenings in the case:

Last week Judge Walsh ruled on all the post trial motions: She refused to reduce the amount of the jury verdict; She appointed a special master to review Hyatt's legal fees before determining an amount of fees to award; and, most importantly, she ruled that California must post a $500 million bond if it wants to appeal.

Wow! Talk about sticking it to the man. Sounds like Hutch and Bullivant Houser have this one locked up. Good job boys! It's just too bad that California is, apparently, judgment proof.

(LawyersUSA; Thanks for the tip, J)

Taxpayers, Rejoice!

Good news, fellow citizens! Metro has agreed to pay a ridiculously high settlement for that guy who insisted on wearing a hat and beard on duty. From the RJ:

The Metropolitan Police Committee on Fiscal Affairs is scheduled to approve a $350,000 payment next week for Detective Steve Riback, an observant Orthodox Jew who claimed he was experiencing religious discrimination on the job.

Fox 5 reported a few more details about the settlement, stating that Riback would be able to keep wearing "a neatly trimmed beard no longer than one-quarter inch and a baseball hat without a logo or with the department's logo."

Three hundred fifty G's and he gets to keep the beard!? Well played, counsel. We hope the defense was able to milk Metro for sufficient billables before advising them to cave to those terms. It seems to us that had a simple letter of apology been written at the outset, Nevada taxpayers may not have been forced to pay off Mr. Riback's mortgage for him. But where's the fun in that?

(RJ, Fox 5)

Valley Layoff Watch

We've held back on posting anything about firm layoffs during these times because, up until now, all we've heard are rumors here and there concerning the occasional "cutback." Well, according to Las Vegas Business Press, it's officially time to start giving this topic some lip service:

Layoffs and firm failures are increasingly hitting the valley as attorneys feel the economic downturn's effects. At least nine more Las Vegas lawyers and other legal professionals have quietly received pink slips in recent months as cash-strapped clients walked away from their bills.

The article focuses primarily on Adams & Rocheleau and Smith Forsberg's layoffs/closings, but Bullivant Houser's trimming of its Vegas office is also mentioned. Additionally, over in the forums, we've heard rumblings of possible cuts from Lewis & Roca, Santoro Driggs, and Greenberg Traurig. We can only wonder how successful Boyd's on campus interviews were this past fall.

So, are these cutbacks really a result of the current economic conditions, or are these firms just using the economy to justify cutting loose some dead weight? Many firms in the Valley have instituted hiring freezes, but are these firms just playing it safe? We know of at least one area of law that is loving this climate: bankruptcy.

So, how about it commenters. Is it time to start panicking, or are lawyers in the valley by and large recession-proof? Let us know your thoughts.

(LV Business Press, LV Sun)

The End Of An Era

It has been a rough couple of months for ticket-busting firms. We suppose that it was only a matter of time, but Craig P. Kenny (who is, perhaps, the most photogenic man alive) has officially put the kibosh on his free ticket-fixing service.

CPK apparently used the free service as a form of advertising, hitting up "clients" for quid pro quo referrals after taking care of their tickets. We're sure that some people were abusing the system, but it was great while it lasted. The sad news from CPK's website:

Q: Is there a charge for you to represent me for my ticket?
A: Yes, we now charge a $50 administrative fee for each basic moving violation citation we handle. Please note that fees will be higher for criminal violations.

Granted, $50 still (likely) makes him the cheapest option in town, but it's not as good as free. It looks like the general public is going to have to start befriending attorneys if they want their tickets fixed gratis. Perish the thought!

Adelson Headed Back to Court

That didn't take long. It appears that the Las Vegas Sands is being hauled back into court to face a shareholder derivative action. From the Sun:

The suit says [Sheldon] Adelson’s ownership of more than 50 percent of the company’s common stock and his ability to elect the entire board makes Las Vegas Sands a "controlled company" and that his "longstanding personal and professional entanglements and relationships with other board members, including Messrs, Chafetz and Forman ... have prevented them from acting independently to fulfill the fiduciary duties owed to Las Vegas Sands and its shareholders."

Oh, come on! Does anybody really believe that the Sands' board does anything that Adelson tells them to do? (That was a joke, of course they do.) Well, good luck to you, Shell. Just be sure to get yourself a defense attorney who isn't a total asshole this time around. 

(LV Sun)

Busy Busy Busy

Nevada courts rank second in the nation (behind Oregon) in heaviest caseloads according to an annual report on the judiciary. From the RGJ:

Nevada's trial judges oversee an average of 1,964 cases each year, making it second in the nation in caseload, in front of California judges, at 1,676, Washington with 1,670 and Arizona at 1,038, the report said. ... In fiscal year 2008, which runs from July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008, the Supreme Court received 2,238 filings, the report said.

Think it may be time for us to get an intermediate appellate court? Naw, too easy. There is some good news in the report:

In district court, the number of civil cases filed jumped about 10 percent during the 2008 fiscal year, while criminal case filings dropped about 3 percent, the report said.

WooHoo! A ten percent increase in work for civil attorneys is great, so long as you are not one of the attorneys who were recently let go due to (apparently illusory) economic concerns.

(RGJ)